The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-10-18
A Card.

To the Editor OF the indianapolis Journal:
The paragraph in your issue of Sunday last.
attributing to John E. Sullivan the responsible
ty of the prosecution now pendinng in the
Criminal Court Of this county against Arthur
Jordan, for maintaining a nuisance, calls for
notice. It is evident that you were misIsd by
false information. AS attorney for the pros
ecuting witnesses, l am in a situation to know
the facts.
The egg packing and poultry establishment Of
Mr.. Jordan is situated in the very heart of the
city, on the corner of Delaware and Maryland
streets. Adjoining it to the south are business
blocks. and just across the alley on which it
abuts is tho St Mary's Church property and
school The complaint the part of the
neishborhood for the stenches, filth and untimely
noises resulting from his business, and the
manner in which it has been conducted, has
been long and loud. The newspapers themselves
have, at times. taken part in it. The congre-
CATION of St. Mary's Church, and the teachers,
patrons and pupils Of the school. have been Pc
culiarly annoyed and agsrieved by it. Instead,
however of appealing to the courts at once for
relief which they had right to do, they pa
tently awaited the result of amicable efforts to
prevail on Mr.. Jordan himself correct the
evil, but to purpose. Matters have been al
lowed by him to go on from bad to worse. until
the agerieved parties have been compelled to
tOCSe tnelr cOupla Win the proper aut0Or1-
ties and. in turn, the grand jury last week
turned into court a bill against Mr.. Jordan.
Now the compliments have disposition to
try this in the newspapers. and do not pro-
pose. therefore, to anticipate the evidence Nor
they interested in any controversy that may
exist between Mr.. Jordan and Mr.. Sullivan.
But they disposed to resist any attempt to
manufacture sentiment in the case In advance
of the trial; hence this card Mr. Sullivan had
moro to do with the institution
of the prosecution against Mr. Jor-
dan than did the Governor of the
State or the President of the United States. No
Indeed if Mr.. Sullivan knew anything about it
in advance of the return of the bill into court
the complaining parties are not aware of it. Mr..
Jordan may be innocent of the charge preferred
against him. If So the trial will developt. His
attempt however. to invoke the sympathy of
the public by falsely attributing the prosecution
to the malice of a rival smacks very much of the
practices frequently employed by offenders to
escape punishment for their offsnses.
J. n. SCOTT
THE concluding insinuation is quite AS
groundless the one against which Mr. Scott
protests. Mr.. Jordan had nothing whatever to
do with the appearance of the Paragraph in the
Journal The Journal is alone responsible for
able fact that the grand jury for which Dir.
Sullivan is responsible. and which has Re-
publican mem Der upon It, has been principally
engaged in indictiDg those who have fallen
der the displeasure of the gang of which Mr..
Sullivan is conspicuous a member. The
Journal has desire to try any pending
before q court in the newspapers. and merely
makes this explanatory note in the interest of the
fair play for which Mr.. Scott asks.-Editor